FPDP Award Fee Plan 2015-2016 Rev 4 (Final) (2)...CONCUR: Reinhard Knerr AWARD FEE PLAN for Fluor...

CONCUR:

Reinhard Knerr

AWARD FEE PLAN

for

Fluor Federal Services, Inc.

Paducah Deactivation Task Order Number DE-DT0007774

Interim Award Fee Evaluation Period August 1, 2015 to July 31, 2016

Date hjfj;) Paducah Deactivation Technical Lead Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office

Date o/f!s-· ortsmouth/Paducah Project Office

APPROVED:

Date:~ Manager Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office

Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant Deactivation Task Order No. DE-DT0007774

Attachment J-11 - Award Fee Plan

Page 2 of 26

AWARD FEE PLAN

FOR FLUOR FEDERAL SERVICES, INC.

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 3 2. DEFINITION OF TERMS ........................................................................................................ 3 3. AWARD FEE STRUCTURE .................................................................................................... 4 4. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE ....................................................................................... 6 5. RESPONSIBILITIES ................................................................................................................ 6 6. AWARD FEE AMOUNTS AND PERIODS ............................................................................ 7 7. AWARD FEE PROCESS .......................................................................................................... 9

EXHIBITS

1. Performance Evaluation Board Members and Advisors 12 2. Award Fee Rating Table, Award Fee Conversion Chart, Award Fee 13

Calculations and Performance Based Incentives 3. Individual Project Team Evaluator Worksheet 20 4. Adjectival Rating Summary Tables 26



Page 3 of 26

1. INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this Award Fee Plan is to define the methodology and responsibilities associated with determining the fee to be awarded to the Contractor. The plan outlines the organization, procedures, evaluation criteria and evaluation periods for implementing the award fee provisions of the Task Order and the Basic Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contract. There is no Base Fee for this Task Order. The objective of the award fee is to emphasize key areas of performance without jeopardizing minimum acceptable performance in all other areas. This plan covers the evaluation period from August 1, 2015 through July 31, 2016 after NTP. This is a hybrid Task Order with Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) and Cost Reimbursable elements and was awarded in July 22, 2014, with a three year Period of Performance, including a 90-day Task Order Implementation Period. No award fee is available to be provisionally paid or earned under CLIN 0001, Task Order Implementation Period. The terms and application of this Award Fee Plan address only the Cost Reimbursable elements of the Task Order work.

2. DEFINITION OF TERMS

a. Available Fee: Fee the Contractor might earn but has not yet earned.

b. Contracting Officer (CO): The individual authorized to commit and obligate the Government through the life of the Task Order. The CO is an advisor to the Performance Evaluation Board (PEB).

c. Earned Fee: The fee due the Contractor by virtue of its meeting the Task Order requirements and the Award Fee Plan entitling it to fee. Earned fee does not occur until the Contractor has met all conditions stated in the Task Order and the Award Fee Plan for earning fee. The evaluation period for the determination of earned fee is the Task Order period of performance.

d. Fee Determining Official (FDO): The individual who determines the amount of

provisional award fee payable to the Contractor for each award fee period and who also makes the final determination as to the total amount of fee which is considered to be earned at the end of the period of performance of the Task Order.

e. Full Contract Performance Baseline (CPB): Represents the cost, schedule, and the

entire scope and entire period of performance as it relates to the total estimated cost of the Task Order exclusive of fee and the FFP Sub-CLINs as stated in Section B of the Task Order.

f. Interim CPB: An Interim CPB is generally required within 90 days from award or Notice to Proceed and will cover the first approximately 15 months of the Task Order. The Interim CPB must match the scope and cost for this period in the Task Order. When the Task Order includes multiple projects and operations activities the Interim CPB



Page 4 of 26

allows tracking of the scope, cost and schedule for each CPB segment until the full CPB with its unique segments are in place.

g. Performance Evaluation Board: The group of individuals who review the Contractor’s performance and recommend an award fee to the FDO. Members of and advisors to the PEB are indicated in Exhibit 1.

h. Performance Evaluation Board Chair (PEBC): The PEB chair is the Department of Energy (DOE) Site Lead, Paducah. This individual directs the activities of the PEB. The PEBC designates members of the PEB: appoints other members, if appropriate, to assist the PEB in performing its functions (e.g., a recording secretary); primary responsibilities are: reviews the Project Team Evaluator’s (PTE) evaluations and considers the Contractor self-assessment; analyzes the Contractor’s performance against the criteria set forth in the Award Fee Plan; provides a recommendation to the Fee Determining Official on the award fee scoring and the amount to be provisionally paid to the Contractor for each evaluation period; provides a recommendation for final fee earned for the period of performance of the Task Order; provides feedback to the Contractor via the CO; and recommends changes to the Award Fee Plan.

i. Project Team Evaluators: The individual(s) assigned to monitor and evaluate the Contractor’s performance on a continuing basis. The PTE’s evaluation is the primary point of reference in determining the recommended provisional fee and award fee, especially the technical support area of performance. The PTE are responsible for providing their input, as requested, to the Technical Lead (TL). The PTE is an advisor(s) to the PEB.

j. Provisional Payment of Fee: The Government’s payment of available fee to the Contractor for making progress towards meeting the performance measures for the incentive before the Contractor has earned the available fee. Annual interim evaluation periods for the determination of provisional fee payments are as established in this Award Fee Plan.

k. Technical Lead: The TL manages the award fee evaluation process, including ensuring that performance data is appropriately collected and documented by the PTE, coordinating the development of the award fee plan and subsequent revisions, and also serving as the recorder, who is responsible for ensuring the PEB is properly convened. The TL is an advisor to the PEB.

3. AWARD FEE STRUCTURE

The award fee will be structured into two sections: a Quality and Effectiveness Categories of Performance section and a Performance Based Incentive (PBI) section.

a. Quality and Effectiveness. This section has been divided into the following incentives:

quality and effectiveness of documents and associated support; quality and effectiveness



Page 5 of 26

of Environment, Safety, Health and Quality Assurance (ESH&QA) Program; quality and effectiveness of program/project support (Reference Section C.1.2.2 of the Task Order); and quality and effectiveness of program/project management (to include change management ensuring the Full CPB remains aligned with the Task Order scope, estimated cost (exclusive of fee) and schedule). Each incentive will be evaluated separately and will receive a grade ranging from Unsatisfactory to Excellent. The percent of available fee placed on this section will be 30%.

For this section, the Contractor must maintain quarterly Paducah Site cumulative Days Away, Restrictions and Transfers (DART) and Total Recordable Cases (TRC) rates at or below the DOE Environmental Management (EM) Goal by the end of each reporting period. The Fiscal Year (FY) Goals for DART and for TRC are the Environmental Management goals issued annually and will be provided by DOE. For each interim evaluation period that the Contractor fails to meet maintain the Goals for DART and for TRC, the total available award fee for the interim evaluation period for this section will be reduced by 10% and will be unavailable for provisional fee payment and will not be available to be earned at the fee evaluation which occurs at the end of the Task Order period of performance.

b. PBIs: This section includes PBI’s for work to be performed during each annual interim evaluation period. The specific performance criteria for each PBI will be determined prior to the annual interim evaluation period and an award fee amount assigned. The percent of available fee placed on this section will be 70%. Each sub-element of the PBI will be evaluated on a Pass-Fail basis. DOE may, at its sole discretion, allow partial provisional fee or earned fee within the PBI, based on the work completed. This Award Fee Plan will be updated annually to include new or revised PBIs and approved by the Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office (PPPO) Manager. For this section, if the Contractor exceeds the total costs of the CPB, then the available fee shall be reduced by the percentage shown in the table below: Cost Overrun Available Fee Reduction 1% 1% 2% 2% 3% 3% 4% 4% 5% 5% 6% 6% 7% 7% 8% 8% 9% 9% 10% 10% 11%-20% 50% 21%-30% 75% Greater than 30% 100%



Page 6 of 26

4. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

a. The Manager, Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office, will serve as the FDO and will establish a PEB. The PEB will assist the FDO in the award fee determination by recommending an award fee for the Contractor’s performance. If a PEB member is absent, the FDO will approve substitute(s) with similar qualifications. Technical and functional experts, as required, may serve in an advisory (non-voting) capacity to the PEB. See Exhibit 1 for members and potential advisors.

b. A copy of the Award Fee Plan shall be provided to the Contractor 30 days prior to the

start of the first evaluation period. This Award Fee Plan shall include both Quality and Effectiveness of Performance Incentives and Performance-Based Incentive award fee criteria (i.e., PBIs) as described in Section 3. Changes which do not impact the award fee criteria or process, such as editorial or personnel changes may be made and implemented without being provided to the Contractor 30 days prior to the start of the evaluation period. All To Be Determined (TBDs) will be finalized and incorporated into this Award Fee Plan unilaterally by the CO prior to the end of the Implementation Period.

c. Award Fee Plan Change Procedures- Changes that do not impact the award fee criteria or process, such as editorial clarifications, personnel changes or other insignificant changes may be made and implemented unilaterally by the Government at any time without providing advance notice to the Contractor. Changes that do impact the award fee criteria or processes may be made unilaterally by the Government, provided the Contractor receives notification 30 days prior to the start of a new evaluation period. Such changes will take effect at the start of the new evaluation period. After an evaluation period has begun, changes may only be made by mutual agreement of the parties. Examples of such changes may include changing evaluation criteria, adjusting weights to redirect Contractor's emphasis to areas needing improvement, and revising the distribution of fee dollars. The Contractor may recommend changes to the CO no later than 90 days prior to the beginning of the new evaluation period.

5. RESPONSIBILITIES

a. The PTE(s) will monitor and evaluate the Contractor’s performance. The PTE(s) will work closely with the CO and TL in performing surveillance duties. PTE(s) will use Exhibit 2, Award Fee Rating Table and Exhibit 3, Individual PTE Worksheet, in monitoring and evaluating Contractor’s performance for the Quality and Effectiveness Categories of Performance. Monitoring and evaluating performance will include but not be limited to the routine interface and oversight of the Contractor and the review of the provided services and work products submitted to DOE by the Contractor. PTE(s) will also evaluate quarterly input by the Contractor.

b. The TL will use the Award Fee Rating Table in Exhibit 2 to determine the adjectival

ratings to be applied to the Quality and Effectiveness Categories of Performance and reported to the PEB. Additionally, the TL will evaluate each PBI to determine the Pass/Fail rating. This PBI evaluation will also be reported to the PEB. The TL will be



Page 7 of 26

thoroughly familiar with current award fee policy, guidance, regulations, and correspondence pertinent to the award fee process. The TL will coordinate administrative actions required by the PTE(s), the PEB, and the FDO. Administrative actions include receiving, processing, and distributing performance evaluation inputs, scheduling and assisting with internal milestones, i.e., PEB briefings, and other actions as required for the smooth operation of the award fee process.

c. The PEB members will review the PTE’s evaluation reports, and the TL’s recommended

adjectival rating for Quality and Effectiveness Categories of Performance. The PEB members will also review the TL’s pass/fail determination with respect to each PBI. After these reviews, the PEB members will consider information from other pertinent sources, and develop a fee recommendation. The PEB chair will provide the fee recommendation to the FDO.

d. The FDO will review the PEB’s recommendations, consider all appropriate data, and

notify the CO in writing of its provisional or final earned fee determination. The CO will prepare a letter for FDO signature notifying the Contractor of the provisional or final earned award fee amount. For the final earned fee determination, the CO will modify Section B.2. of the Task Order to reflect the earned award fee for the Task Order Period of Performance.

e. The final determination for award fee earned under this Task Order shall be made unilaterally by the FDO. This determination shall be based upon the FDO's evaluation of the Contractor's performance, as measured against the evaluation criteria set forth in the Award Fee Plan.

6. AWARD FEE AMOUNTS AND PERIODS

a. The total award fee available to be earned at the end of the three-year Task Order period of performance is $19,218,562. An annual amount of provisional award fee will be available for each interim evaluation period subject to Task Order adjustments through modification of the Task Order.

b. Following are the amounts of fee currently available for provisional payment for each

interim evaluation period:

Interim Evaluation Period Amount of Provisional Fee Available* 7/22/14 – 7/31/15 $ 6,406,187.33

8/1/15 – 7/31/16 $ 6,406,187.33 8/1/16 – 7/21/17 $ 6,406,187.33

* The amounts corresponding to each interim evaluation period are the maximum amount of provisional fee for that particular period unless the amount is increased by Task Order modification or reduced pursuant to Task Order clauses.



Page 8 of 26

c. The CO may authorize provisional payments of up to 85% of the available award fee for the period of performance. The CO will take into consideration the Contractor’s performance from a quality, cost and schedule standpoint when determining specific provisional fee amounts. No such provisional payments will be authorized however, unless and until the Contractor has a DOE approved Earned Value Management System and the Contract Performance Baseline is aligned with the Task Order.

d. These payments are at the discretion of the CO and are entirely provisional (i.e., award fee is not earned until the FDO has issued an Earned Fee Determination at the end of the Task Order Period of Performance). The Contractor may be required to return any provisional fee payments which exceed the amount of the FDO’s final determination of earned fee (which occurs at the conclusion of the Task Order period of performance) and conversely the Contractor may be permitted to invoice for any underpayments of provisional fee should this fee determination exceed the provisional fee payments. The Government may use invoice deductions to offset any provisional fee overpayments.

e. At the end of each Interim Evaluation Period, the Contractor will be measured against the evaluation and performance criteria and will be assigned a rating using the Award Fee Calculation Methodology (Exhibit 2). This rating will be used to calculate any provisional fee payments.

f. If the CO has authorized provisional payments more frequently than annually, these payments will be reconciled at the annual interim evaluation. If the payments exceed the provisional fee determination for the annual interim evaluation period, the Contractor may be required to provide a credit against future payment vouchers and/or refund any difference. The CO may suspend or reduce provisional fee payments if the Government determines that the performance and/or evaluation criteria are not being met. The FDO’s determination that the Contractor has met the requirements for the provisional payment of fee for any particular incentive during a particular interim evaluation period has no bearing on whether the Contractor is actually entitled to earn any fee at the conclusion of the Task Order. Provisional payment of fee is a separate and distinct concept from earned fee. The determination as to the amount of fee earned by the Contractor is only made at the end of the Task Order’s period of performance by the FDO. In some instances, for example, a Contractor could conceivably receive 100% of possible provisional fee payments during the course of performance yet not earn any fee. In that case, the Contractor would be required to return all provisional fee payments. The Contractor could in other instances, for example, receive 0% of possible provisional fee payments; yet eventually earn the entire amount of available fee assuming all Task Order and award fee requirements were met.

g. If the CO reduces fee in accordance with the Task Order Clause I.230 entitled “DEAR 970.5215-3, Conditional Payment of Fee, Profit, or Incentives—Facility Management Contracts (AUG 2009)” or other Task Order clauses, the total available award fee pool for the Task Order Period of Performance shall be decreased by the equivalent amount. The amount of reduction under this clause shall not exceed any provisional fee paid or



Page 9 of 26

provisional amounts of fee determined otherwise payable in the interim evaluation period.

7. AWARD FEE PROCESS

a. PTE Actions

1) PTE(s) will continually monitor and evaluate the specific elements of the Contractor’s Quality and Effectiveness Categories of Performance that are within their purview using the criteria contained in Exhibit 3, Individual Project Team Evaluator (PTE) Worksheet. Evaluating performance will include, but not be limited to, the regular interface and monitoring of the Contractor and the review of the provided services and work products submitted to DOE by the Contractor. PTE(s) will document their evaluation of the Contractor on a quarterly basis.

2) The PTE will review and evaluate, as applicable, evaluation criteria in Exhibit 3 to determine the performance level of the Contractor. If the Contractor’s performance negatively impacts ES&H or the safeguarding of restricted data pursuant to the Task Order, the PTE shall notify the Site Lead and the CO. At the end of each quarter the PTE will submit Exhibit 3 including their adjectival rating of the Contractor to the TL.

b. Technical Lead’s Actions

1) The TL will independently assess the Contractor’s performance in accordance

with Exhibit 3 and will also select an adjectival rating for each of the Quality and Effectiveness Category of Performance items based on his/her personal observations of performance.

2) The TL will evaluate each PBI and any applicable sub-elements to determine the Pass/Fail rating and the extent to which the requirements of any sub-element have been met. Based on this assessment, the TL will recommend full payment of fee or partial proportional payment based on individual sub-element completion.

3) The TL will use Exhibit 4, Adjectival Rating Summary Tables, to record the PTE’s adjectival rating for the quarter and the TL’s adjectival rating. The TL is not permitted to change the PTE’s adjectival rating. Should the TL’s rating differ significantly from that of the PTEs’, the TL shall ensure that the rationale is fully documented and provided to the PEB.

4) The TL notifies PEB members and any advisors of the date and time of the PEB meetings in accordance with the schedule established by the PEB chair. Additionally, the TL notifies the Contractor of the date and time of PEB meetings and advises the Contractor of when and how (written, oral, or both) it will be permitted to address the PEB as determined by the PEB chair. Generally, the Contractor will be given the opportunity to provide written materials (limited to



Page 10 of 26

no more than 20 pages) and make an oral presentation of up to 45 minutes. The presentation material should be provided one week in advance of the PEB meeting and should be in the form of a self-assessment measured against each of the four Quality and Effectiveness Categories of Performance and the PBIs. Prior to the PEB meeting, the TL will provide the PEB members with a page-numbered binder to include, at a minimum, the input for the fiscal year from the PTE members, evaluation report, the forms required to be filled out during the evaluation meeting, and the Contractor’s award fee presentation.

c. PEB Actions

1) In general, the PEB Chair will meet quarterly with the Contractor (the first

through third quarters) to discuss PTE and TL ratings. This enables the Contractor to take corrective actions prior to the next evaluation period should performance or cost issues arise.

2) The DOE Site Lead, Paducah will chair the PEB. The PEB chair will establish dates, times, and places for the PEB meeting and notify the TL, who is responsible for notifying members, advisors, and the Contractor. The chair will schedule the PEB meeting to ensure the PEB’s recommended fee is presented to the FDO within 30 days following the close of the evaluation period.

3) PEB members will consider all information from the following sources in

determining their award fee recommendation to the FDO:

a) Evaluations submitted by the PTEs and TL (for Quality and Effectiveness Categories of Performance and pass/fail determination with respect to each PBI). The chair may require oral briefings by the PTE.

b) Evaluations pertaining to the pass/fail determination of DART and TRC and cost overruns.

c) Contractor’s written and/or oral self-assessment of performance.

4) Using Exhibit 4, each member of the PEB will provide their adjectival rating to the Chair. The chair will collect facilitate discussion amongst the members in order to reach consensus on the ratings. Once the PEB has reached consensus on the rating results, the chair will forward a fee recommendation to the FDO, in accordance with the requirements of this plan.

5) If consensus cannot be reached, the chair will present the majority opinion as well as the differing opinion to the FDO for consideration in their determination of provisional or earned award fee.

d. FDO’s Actions

1) The FDO approves the PEB members recommended by the chair.



Page 11 of 26

2) The FDO determines the award fee amount based upon the information furnished

by the PEB. This fee determination will be provisional (if executed during the annual review periods), or earned (if made at the conclusion of the Task Order).

Note: The award fee amount, provisional and earned, indicated by the use of the Award Fee Conversion Chart is a guide to the FDO. Use of the Award Fee Conversion Chart does not remove the element of judgment from the award fee process.

e. CO’s Actions

1) The CO will prepare a letter for the FDO’s signature notifying the Contractor of

the amount of fee to be paid to the Contractor, both provisional and earned award fee.

2) The CO will unilaterally modify the Task Order to reflect the FDO’s determination of award fee.

3) In accordance with Head of Contracting Activity, Office of Environmental Management Directive, (EM HCA Directive 2.6, dated June 11, 2012), the CO will post on the local Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office website (a) the executed modification, (b) one-page scorecard, (c) Award Fee Determination Letter, and (d) Performance Evaluation Report.



Page 12 of 26

Exhibit 1

Performance Evaluation Board Members and Advisors Fee Determining Official: Manager, PPPO Lexington William E. Murphie Following are PEB members and advisors: Site Lead, Paducah (Chair) Jennifer Woodard Deputy Manager, PPPO Lexington Robert E. Edwards, III Lead Contracting Official, PPPO Lexington Robert Swett Federal Project Director Reinhard Knerr *Contracting Officer David R. Senderling *Technical Lead Reinhard Knerr *Attorney Advisor Jason Sherman *Project Team Evaluators1

Russell McCallister, Quality Assurance Mark Allen, Security Steve Casey, Infrastructure Engineer James Woods, IT Tom Hines, Nuclear Safety Dave Dollins, Groundwater Federal Project Director James Johnson, GFS&I & DUF6 Deborah Kerner, Program Analyst

*Advisors Only - Non-Voting Participants

1 The PEB Chair may add, remove or replace additional PTEs throughout the Task Order period of performance, as appropriate.

Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant Deactivation Services Task Order No. DE-DT0007774

Exhibit 2 Attachment J-11 - Award Fee Plan

Page 13 of 26

Award Fee Rating Table, Award Fee Conversion Chart, Award Fee Calculations and Performance Based Incentives

AWARD FEE RATING TABLE

ADJECTIVAL RATING DEFINITION EXCELLENT

91%-100% Contractor has exceeded all or almost all of the significant award-fee criteria and has met overall

cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements

of the Task Order in the aggregate as defined and

measured against the criteria in the award-fee plan for

the award-fee evaluation period. VERY GOOD

76%-90% Contractor has exceeded many of the significant award-fee criteria and has met overall cost, schedule, and

technical performance requirements of the Task Order in

the aggregate as defined and measured against the

criteria in the award-fee plan for the award-fee

evaluation period. GOOD

51%-75% Contractor has exceeded some of the significant award-fee criteria and has met overall cost, schedule, and




evaluation period. SATISFACTORY

No Greater Than 50%

Contractor has met overall cost, schedule, and





Page 14 of 26


evaluation period.

UNSATISFACTORY

0% Contractor has failed to meet overall cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements of the Task

Order in the aggregate as defined and measured against

the criteria in the award-fee plan for the award-fee

evaluation period.



Page 15 of 26

Award Fee Rating Table, Award Fee Conversion Chart, Award Fee Calculations and Performance Based Incentives

AWARD FEE CONVERSION CHART

ADJECTIVAL RATING EVALUATION

POINTS (OVERALL WEIGHTED RESULT)

PERCENTAGE OF AWARD

FEE EXCELLENT 23-25 91 to 100% VERY GOOD 19-22 76 to 90% GOOD 14-18 51 to 75% SATISFACTORY 8-13 No Greater Than

50% UNSATISFACTORY 0-7 0%

PERFORMANCE BASED INCENTIVES Percentage of Available PBI Fee

Interim Evaluation Period 2 (August 1, 2015 – July 31, 2016)

1. Facility Stabilization 50%

2. Utility and Laboratory Optimization 15%

3. Surveillance and Maintenance Tasks 35%

QUALITY AND EFFECTIVENESS CATEGORIES OF PERFORMANCE

Weightings

1. Quality and Effectiveness of Documents and Associated Support 20% 2. Quality and Effectiveness of Environment, Safety, Health and

Quality Assurance 35%

3. Quality and Effectiveness of Program/Project Support (Reference Section C.1.2.2 of the Task Order)

25%

4. Quality and Effectiveness of Program/Project Management (to include change management ensure the performance baseline remains aligned with the Task Order scope, cost and schedule)

20%



Page 16 of 26

Interim Evaluation Period 2 (August 1, 2015 – July 31, 2016)

1. Facility Deactivation & Stabilization (50% of total PBI fee)

a) Complete removal and off-site dispositioning (e.g., disposal or recycling) by 4/31/16 of 100% of the lube oil in the process buildings (C-310, C-315, C-360, C-331, C-333, C-333-A, C-335, C-337 and C-337-A) not being re-used on-site. For any lube oil being re-used on-site other than for cell treatment (e.g., rinsate for PCB transformers), complete removal and off-site dispositioning (e.g., disposal or recycling) by 7/31/16. The lube oil is considered dispositioned when it has been shipped to, and accepted at, a properly licensed and permitted disposal site or recycler. (weighted 15% of Facility Deactivation & Stabilization fee)

b) Complete in-situ chemical deposit and mechanical removal activities as specified below. (weighted 85% of Facility Deactivation & Stabilization fee as defined in each element i-vi below):

i. Complete construction and functional testing of all 10 Portable Cell Treatment Carts (PCTC) and associated Analytical Test Carts (ATC) no later than 12/31/15. (5%)

Completion of construction and functional testing is defined as having the PCTC and associated ATC

On site and fully assembled, passivated, and successfully tested in accordance with a DOE approved functional

test plan ii. Develop and implement a measurement system compliant with DOE Order 414.1C

as specified in DOE/PPPO/03-0235&D1 (QSNDA requirements) or in another DOE/PPPO approved QSNDA System Document no later than 3/15/16 that is capable of

a. measuring waste drums of trapping media generated from the deposit removal program (5%); and

b. characterizing cells/piping and identifying deposits/hold-up to a level that supports the implementation of the NCS CI limits for the process equipment following in-situ chemical deposit removal (20%).

Completion must be demonstrated by: construction (or acquisition) and certification of measurement standards

required for measurement system calibration; passing a DOE Performance Demonstration Program (PDP) (or DOE

approved alternative approach); and successfully (able to measure to levels needed to support criticality

incredible limits) complete post-treatment characterization of at least one cell using the QSNDA compliant measurement system.

iii. Develop nuclear criticality safety limits (step out criteria) necessary to justify criticality incredible for the process buildings (C-310, C-315, C-360, C-331, C-



Page 17 of 26

333, C-333-A, C-335, C-337 and C-337-A) and tie-lines to allow in-situ deposit removal to downgrade the facilities to radiological facilities by 3/31/16. Note: DOE recognizes that these limits will need to be developed well in advance of 3/31/16 for C-337 and C-333 in order to be able to successfully support a QSNDA compliance measurement system. Completion is demonstrated by DOE approval of the step out criteria. (10%)

iv. In C-337 (including C-337-A), complete a. in-situ chemical deposit removal of 12 cells (demonstration cells) by 4/1/16

(10%) b. in-situ chemical deposit removal of 12 additional cells (24 cells total) and

20% of facility piping by 7/31/16 (10%); c. disposal of 40% of all loose fissile (as defined by item iii above as those

items required to be removed to support criticality incredible) equipment/components/spares by 7/31/16 (10%); and

d. removal and disposal of 10% of the items requiring mechanical removal, including instrument lines (as defined by item iii above as those items required to be removed to support criticality incredible) by 7/31/16 (10%).

v. In C-333 (including C-333-A), a. complete design, procurement, installation and testing of PGDP facility

modifications necessary to support the deposit/hold-up removal in the C-333 building by 12/31/15 (5%); and

b. maintain in-situ chemical deposit removal with a minimum of one cell/PCTC undergoing treatment at all times (excludes outages associated with maintenance and relocation activities – which are performed in a timely manner) from 2/1/16 through 7/31/16. (5%)

vi. In C-360, complete removal and disposal of 50% of the fissile material/equipment/spares by 7/31/16. (10%)

2. Utility and Laboratory Optimization (15% of total PBI fee)

a) Complete reconfiguration of the 14kV Power Distribution System no later than 9/30/15 as

described below: (55% of Utility and Laboratory Optimization fee) Completing the physical installation and tie-ins of all the 14kV loads serviced out

of the switchyard (C-533, C-535 or C-537); Providing all of the 14kV loads previously provided by the switchyard (C-533, C-

535, C-537), including all control system modifications, from the C-531 switchyard;

De-energizing all of the 14kV buses in the switchyard (C-533, C-535 or C-537). It is understood that some 14kV feeder cables back-fed from C-531 will remain energized to provide “station service” and pump house loads.

b) The contractor shall complete full de-inventorying and deactivation of the C-727 Low Level Waste Storage Facility, removing all hazardous equipment and materials, all materials and equipment, and other items necessary to leave the facility in a demo-ready state by 7/31/16. (weighted 45% of Utility and Laboratory Optimization fee as defined in each element i-iv below)



Page 18 of 26

i. Complete clean-out, removal and disposition of all tanks, pits, piping, etc. AND complete removal and disposition of all facility equipment, personal property/fixtures, tanks, drums, asbestos, LLW, and PCB contaminated items leaving nothing remaining in the facility. (45%)

ii. Complete air gapping all utilities services to the facility OR gain DOE approval to re-use the facility of other Deactivation or Infrastructure Contractor operations. (20%)

iii. Complete disposal of all wastes generated from these projects. Waste is considered disposed of when it has been shipped to, and accepted for final disposition at, a properly licensed and permitted disposal site. (15%)

iv. Complete all tasks necessary to support shutdown and removal of the fire suppression systems from these facilities, including the submittal of any and all remaining documentation (must be complete and acceptable) required to justify the downgrading of these facilities consistent with DOE Orders/Requirements. (20%)

3. Surveillance and Maintenance Tasks (35% of total PBI fee)

a) All deferred maintenance on industrial or radiological systems that are related to or support safety not specifically associated with facilities/systems undergoing active D&D or being deactivated for future D&D is completed. (25% of Surveillance and Maintenance Tasks fee as defined in each element i-v below)

i. No later than 8/31/15, submit a comprehensive, itemized listing of all industrial or radiological systems that are related to or support safety for all Contractor Facilities; the maintenance status of those systems; whether, based on the Task Order scope, maintenance of those systems is warranted or if the facility is undergoing active D&D/deactivation; and ROM for required maintenance for all systems. In general, DOE supports a controlled processes to deactivation and does not support allowing degradation or failures to systems that support safety to drive system deactivation (5%);

ii. No later than 10/31/15 complete 30% of deferred maintenance activities; (30%) iii. No later than 1/31/16 complete 75% of deferred maintenance activities; (30%) iv. No later than 4/31/16 complete 100% of deferred maintenance activities; (30%)

and v. Ensure that compensatory measures are in place and that for new system

degradation that no repair exceeds 30 days without written concurrence from DOE. (5%)

b) Complete installation of a new roof system on C-337 that covers the entire roof, is impermeable/weatherproof, and has a 30-year lifespan no later than 9/30/15. (20% of Surveillance and Maintenance Tasks fee)

Completion includes any and all work to seal the interface between the new roof system and any roof protrusions, such as vents.

Complete disposal of all waste generated from this project. Waste is considered disposed of when it has been shipped to, and accepted for final disposition at, a properly licensed and permitted disposal site.



Page 19 of 26

c) Complete installation of new roof systems on C-335 and C-331 that covers the entire roof, is impermeable/weatherproof, and has a 30-year lifespan no later than 7/31/16. (25% of Surveillance and Maintenance Tasks fee)

Completion includes any and all work to seal the interface between the new roof system and any roof protrusions, such as vents.

Complete disposal of all waste generated from this project. Waste is considered disposed of when it has been shipped to, and accepted for final disposition at, a properly licensed and permitted disposal site.

d) Complete all tasks necessary to support shutdown and removal of the CAAS and fire suppression systems from C-720 (excluding C-720-C and current stores areas) and C-409, including the submittal of any and all remaining documentation (must be complete and acceptable) required to justify the downgrading of these facilities consistent with DOE Orders/Requirements by 10/31/15. (30% of Surveillance and Maintenance Tasks fee)

Complete all actions necessary to compliantly de-inventory the remaining (all) fissile materials from C-720 (excluding those activities in necessary to support deposit removal in C-720-C) and C-409 by 9/30/15. Major process components may be relocated to other facilities, but all other fissile material will be disposed of as waste.

Complete removal and disposal of all loose combustible material from C-720 and C-409 by 9/30/15.

Waste is considered disposed of when it has been shipped to, and accepted for final disposition at, a properly licensed and permitted disposal site.

Quality and Effectiveness Categories of Performance Award Fee Calculation Methodology: 1. Assign rating (0-25) for each Quality and Effectiveness Categories of Performance. 2. Multiply weighting percentage to each Categories of Performance to arrive at weighted result. 3. Add weighted results together to arrive at overall weighted result. Example: PTE Ratings: Quality and Effectiveness of Documents and Support – 23 Quality and Effectiveness of Environment, Safety, Health and Quality Assurance– 25 Quality and Effectiveness of Program/Project Support – 24 Quality and Effectiveness of Program/Project Management– 20

Weighted Result: (23 x 20%) + (25 x 35%) + (24 x 25%) + (20 x 20 %) = 24.5 Overall Weighted Result: 24.5 rounds to 25. Adjectival rating (Award Fee Conversion Chart): Excellent Rounding Rule: .5 and above is rounded up to the next whole number.



Page 20 of 26

Individual Project Team Evaluator Worksheet Project Team Evaluator Name: __________________

FY: _______ Quarter: _______

Quality and Effectiveness Category of Performance (EVALUATION WEIGHTING)

EXCELLENT VERY GOOD GOOD SATISFACTORY UNSATISFACTORY N/A

1. Quality and Effectiveness of Documents and Associated Support (20%)

23-25 19-22 14-18 8-13 0-7

EVALUATION CRITERIA Check Appropriate Box

NOTES ON PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

1.a The Contractor will be evaluated on: the quality and timeliness of their documents and submittals; permit submittals and modifications; standard reports such as operating and quarterly groundwater reports, and contract plans and deliverables. Measures of quality include technical and factual accuracy, completeness, meets regulatory requirements and requires minimal re-work or revision.

Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory N/A

1.b The Contractor will be evaluated on the quality and timeliness of response to inquiries from DOE, regulatory agencies, stakeholders and any other party. This includes responses to comments received on regulatory documents, permit transmittals, and modifications. Measures of quality include technical and factual accuracy and clarity of response, effectiveness (e.g. enhances understanding, improves the regulatory process, and promotes the accomplishment of regulatory and other goals) and minimizes response time.


1.c The Contractor will be evaluated on its ability to execute quality and timely legal review of all documentation (regulatory and otherwise), prior to submission to DOE, ensuring that potential strategic impacts and risks to DOE are highlighted and/or mitigated, and that all documentation is accurate and meets legal sufficiency.




Page 21 of 26

Project Team Evaluator (PTE) Name: __________________

FY: _______ Quarter: _______



2. Quality and Effectiveness of Environment, Safety, Health, and Quality Assurance (ESH&QA) (35%)

23-25 19-22 14-18 8-13 0-7



2.a The Contractor will be evaluated on the quality of their policies, plans, and procedures governing ESH&QA programs, including, but not limited to, documents prepared to implement and support the programs listed in item 2b. Measures of quality include technical and factual accuracy, completeness, meets regulatory requirements and requires minimal re-work or revision.


2.b The Contractor will be evaluated on their application and incorporation of ESH&QA principles and requirements into work scopes and specific programs and efforts, including but not limited to Integrated Safety Management, radiological protection, environmental protection, industrial safety, security (includes Cyber-Security), nuclear safety, waste shipping, emergency management, waste minimization, Conduct of Operations, QA, and work planning initiatives. Evidence of such application and implementation includes written conformance with DOE Policies, Orders and standards, development and implementation of programs and practices to meet and enhance ESH&Q, and demonstrated performance against DOE and regulatory requirements.




Page 22 of 26

2.c The Contractor will be evaluated on their ability to effectively and timely identify, manage, prevent or correct, report and resolve deficiencies within the ISMS program. Contractor will also be evaluated on the thoroughness of their response to deficiencies to prevent recurrence of the deficiency including the manner and adequacy of tracking, trending, and root cause/lessons learned analyses, reporting, and formal closure processes.




Page 23 of 26


FY: _______ Quarter: _______

Quality and Effectiveness Category of Performance

(EVALUATION WEIGHTING) EXCELLENT VERY GOOD GOOD SATISFACTORY UNSATISFACTORY N/A

3. Quality and Effectiveness of Program/Project Support (25%)

23-25 19-22 14-18 8-13 0-7



3.a The Contractor will be evaluated on the effectiveness, timeliness and quality of support provided to DOE as identified in section C.1.2.2 of its Task Order. Evidence will include meeting due dates, meeting and exceeding program requirements, minimizing re-work, enhancing the work schedule, and minimizing and reducing costs associated with the work scope.


3.b Functional organizations support the Task Order mission efficiently, identifying realistic and feasible cost savings, and areas for improvement.


3.c Provides efficient and effective engineering services, administrative services, project control tasks and information management services. Evidence will include demonstrated initiatives to minimize or reduce costs.


3.d The Contractor will be evaluated on the effectiveness and timeliness of implementation of its public relations program. Evidence will include the clarity and technical accuracy of briefing materials and presentations and the pro-active implementation of communication strategies with the site stakeholders.




Page 24 of 26


FY: _______ Quarter: _______



4. Quality and Effectiveness of Program/Project Management ( to include change management ensuring the Full CPB remains aligned with the Task Order scope, estimated cost (exclusive of fee) and schedule) (20%)

23-25 19-22 14-18 8-13 0-7



4.a The Contractor will be evaluated on how programs and projects are managed, and costs are tracked and reported. This includes the accuracy of EAC projections and baseline change processes and management. In addition, the Contractor will be evaluated on its ability to submit timely, accurate, and auditable proposals.


4.b The Contractor will be evaluated on overall and specific program and project status performance against the approved baseline, and the effectiveness of program and project reporting tools and systems.


4.c The Contractor will be evaluated on the effectiveness of coordination with the Infrastructure Contractor or Other Site Contractors to support and implement service provided services as described in the Interface Requirements Matrix (Attachment J-5) and Section C.1.8 which results in reduction of costs to implement these services.




Page 25 of 26

4.d The Contractor will be evaluated on developing and presenting initiatives which result in tangible savings to DOE (cost, schedule or risk). This includes the quality and effectiveness of facility modifications and utility optimizations.


4.e The Contractor will be evaluated on the effectiveness, timeliness and adequacy of its ability to perform tasks in most cost effective manner consistent with approved baselines.


4.f The Contractor will be evaluated on the number of items and overall volume of equipment and materials transferred to PACRO. Transfer is defined as PACRO taking ownership of the equipment and materials and physically removing it from the site.




Page 26 of 26

Adjectival Rating Summary Tables

Quality and Effectiveness Categories of Performance Technical Lead

ADJECTIVAL RATING

1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr TL Rating 1. 2. 3. 4.

CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL ADJECTIVAL RATING-PTE Quality and Effectiveness Categories of Performance

ADJECTIVAL RATING

1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter PTE Recommended Rating for the Year

1. 2. 3. 4.

SUMMARY OF PTE/PEB RATING Member 1. Documents and

Support 2. Environment, Safety,

Heath & Quality 3. Project Support 4. Project Management

Insert Name of Evaluator Insert Name of Evaluator Insert Name of Evaluator Insert Name of Evaluator Insert Name of Evaluator Insert Name of Evaluator

FPDP Award Fee Plan 2015-2016 Rev 4 (Final) (2)...CONCUR: Reinhard Knerr AWARD FEE PLAN for Fluor...

Documents

Transcript of FPDP Award Fee Plan 2015-2016 Rev 4 (Final) (2)...CONCUR: Reinhard Knerr AWARD FEE PLAN for Fluor...